KnowledgeFMath: A Knowledge-Intensive Math Reasoning Dataset in Finance Domains (2024.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing benchmarks for large language models (LLMs) are only 56.6% accurate, leaving room for improvement. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark to evaluate LLMs' capabilities in solving knowledge-intensive math reasoning problems using a finance-domain knowledge bank and expert-annotated solution references. |
| Outcome: | The proposed system achieves only 56.6% accuracy, leaving room for improvement. |
Similar Papers
FinanceReasoning: Benchmarking Financial Numerical Reasoning More Credible, Comprehensive and Challenging (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Zichen Tang, Haihong E, Ziyan Ma, Haoyang He, Jiacheng Liu, Zhongjun Yang, Zihua Rong, Rongjin Li, Kun Ji, Qing Huang, Xinyang Hu, Yang Liu, Qianhe Zheng
| Challenge: | Compared to existing benchmarks, FinanceReasoning provides three key advancements: (1) credibility; (2) comprehensiveness; (3) numerical precision; (4) complexity; (5) complexity; and (6) complexity. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of large reasoning models (LRMs) in financial numerical reasoning problems. |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmark exceeds existing benchmarks in 67.8% of financial concepts and formulas and is credible, comprehensive, and challenging. |
XFinBench: Benchmarking LLMs in Complex Financial Problem Solving and Reasoning (2025.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing large language models (LLMs) lack advanced capabilities such as temporal reasoning, future forecasting, and numerical modeling. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmarking tool to evaluate LLMs' ability to solve complex financial problems across diverse graduate-level finance topics with multi-modal context. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model improves on the o1 model but still lags behind human experts in temporal reasoning and scenario planning capabilities. |
BizBench: A Quantitative Reasoning Benchmark for Business and Finance (2024.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Answering questions within business and finance requires reasoning, precision, and a wide-breadth of technical knowledge. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark for evaluating models’ ability to reason about realistic financial problems by focusing on question-answering over financial data via program synthesis. |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmark evaluates models' financial background knowledge, ability to parse financial documents, and capacity to solve complex problems with code. |
FinQA: A Dataset of Numerical Reasoning over Financial Data (2021.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
Zhiyu Chen, Wenhu Chen, Charese Smiley, Sameena Shah, Iana Borova, Dylan Langdon, Reema Moussa, Matt Beane, Ting-Hao Huang, Bryan Routledge, William Yang Wang
| Challenge: | Popular, large, pre-trained models fall far short of expert humans in acquiring finance knowledge and in complex multi-step numerical reasoning on that knowledge. |
| Approach: | They propose a large-scale dataset with Question-Answering pairs over financial reports written by financial experts to facilitate analytical progress. |
| Outcome: | The proposed dataset is the first of its kind and is available on github. |
Do LLMs Overthink Basic Math Reasoning? Benchmarking the Accuracy-Efficiency Tradeoff in Language Models (2026.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models (LLMs) achieve impressive performance on complex benchmarks yet sometimes fail on basic math reasoning. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark to evaluate the efficiency of reasoning in large language models . they formalize the accuracy-verbosity tradeoff and introduce the overthinking score . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model performs well on complex benchmarks but fails on basic math reasoning . the proposed model generates 18 more tokens while achieving lower accuracy . |
Learning to Solve Domain-Specific Calculation Problems with Knowledge-Intensive Programs Generator (2025.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Domain Large Language Models (LLMs) are developed for domain-specific tasks based on general LLMs, but it still requires professional knowledge to facilitate the expertise for some domain- specific tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose a pipeline to solve domain-specific calculation problems with KIPG . they use it to extract key variables and calculate outcomes dependent on domain knowledge . |
| Outcome: | The proposed pipeline solves domain-specific calculation problems more effectively . it generates knowledge-intensive programs according to the domain- specific documents . |
GSM-Plus: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating the Robustness of LLMs as Mathematical Problem Solvers (2024.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive performance across various mathematical reasoning benchmarks. |
| Approach: | They introduce an adversarial grade school math dataset and explore whether LLMs can be more robust when questions are slightly changed. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method generates and verifies each intermediate thought based on its reasoning goal and calculation result. |
Have LLMs Advanced Enough? A Challenging Problem Solving Benchmark For Large Language Models (2023.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | The performance of large language models (LLMs) on existing reasoning benchmarks has significantly improved over the past decade. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark dataset for evaluating the problem solving abilities of large language models (LLMs) they curate 515 challenging problems from the highly competitive IIT JEE-Advanced exam. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model performs better on open-source and proprietary models than the current model, but with techniques like self-consistency, self-refinement and chain-of-thought prompting. |
LLMs Are Not Intelligent Thinkers: Introducing Mathematical Topic Tree Benchmark for Comprehensive Evaluation of LLMs (2025.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models (LLMs) have impressive capabilities in mathematical reasoning, but their effectiveness is limited to specific mathematical topics. |
| Approach: | They propose to use the MaTT benchmark to assess large language models' accuracy in multiple-choice scenarios. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model achieved 54% accuracy in a multiple-choice scenario, while the Chain-of-Thought prompting did not improve. |
Exposing the Achilles’ Heel: Evaluating LLMs Ability to Handle Mistakes in Mathematical Reasoning (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing evaluations focus on final accuracy, neglecting the critical aspect of reasoning capabilities. |
| Approach: | They propose to evaluate LLMs’ abilities to detect and correct reasoning mistakes by using rule-based methods and smaller language models. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model outperforms existing models such as GPT-4o and GPT4 in both accuracy and accuracy, but lacks data contamination and memorization concerns. |